>>56836896>>56836896>We have no idea what the "situation" is because it's a seperate timelineYou're treating it like an alternate universe, you know timelines and universes aren't interchangeable right?
Universes are wholly separate instances while timelines branch off.
We would know that everything before your meeting played out the exact same way with the crystal lake event being the divergence point and by the we already know that they're making plans for a time machine.
>I am researching methods to catch Pokémon that live in different timelines, so I might transport them to the present day in my own timeline. It sounds fantastical, no doubt, but I am drafting plans for a machine that may achieve it.>And why would it end there Because the white book wouldn't be made in that timeline, it would just be the one copy the professor has and they also wouldn't have their SV books.
They are very, very important items when it comes to making all of this work.
>we have no idea how many timelines came before that. Of course we do.
It would be one.
An infinite recursion can't logically be made with time as it is since an infinite recursion requires consistent logic but a new timeline requires a change but for the purposes of the conversation it would work like this sloppy diagram I made because I'm not going to Alt-tab out of my game.
Anyway, if you're suggesting that the game timeline isn't the first and the trade changes the timeline then that can only make it the second instance since the third ends the recursion.
That leaves one timeline above it to act as the first top most turtle and the original timeline that influences the next. Logically you can't have anything above that without breaking the rules of recursion, not that you care since this theory is pure hogwash but still.
I'm trying to make sense of something that logically can't work because you won't, sue me.
